it feels like it's running too fast.
it's odd. when I watch 60 fps records of video games it's feels too fast aswell but when you play them for yourself than it's ok.

Its change in the wrong direction like the 3D gimick in movies. Thankfully everyone hates 48fps.

It's no different than the switch from SD to HD.

I think the main thing film makers will need to overcome if they switch to 48fps is it's easier to see the difference between on set and on location, and CGI vs real.

It is even the case when switching from SD to HD. One of my earliest HD experiences was watching Saving Private Ryan. In HD it was so obvious that things were being filmed on a film set that it actually ruined the immersion in a film that really relies on the audience being immersed in the experience the soldiers are going through. Though the visual quality was obviously superior in HD I enjoyed watching it less.

I'm now used to watching movies in HD and now movies with a strong visual component in SD look shit.

Like 3D though, I think it's possibly going to take a James Cameron movie to make 48fps the new fad. Like Avatar, such a James Cameron movie will be rubbish, but Cameron will integrate 48fps into the filming process flawlessly and truly show that it is superior in all respects to 24fps.

I don't think Jackson put all the necessary elements together to make 48fps work as well as it could. But I do think it was a good start. I hope DoS and Hobbit 3 improve on the first movie to make the 48fps an over all better experience. I hope they also put the 48fps version out in 2D because I hate 3D.

Eh...just get a TV with Motion Interpolation if you want higher framerates. Movies will probably remain 24 fps for a while until they get a better handle with higher framerates. I think even with Interpolation, movies look and feel fine on my 120hz TV, hell I even use it for console games for smoother framerates, and don't really get problems at all, aside from visual artifacts (that don't bother me). If you don't like the visual artifacts in movies though from Interpolation (some TVs are better than others with this), then oh well, stick with 24 and shut up.

Tagging...

Teh 48fps one looks like it's fast forwarding to me.

In a few years its all gonna be 48fps whether we like it or not

HD versions of old movies can be really good, Alien and The Shining look great in HD imo. 2001 and  the other movies that were originally shot in 70mm look stunning as well. In some movies you get a  peak behind the scenes. For example in the dark crystal the wires become visible. That doesn't bother me though, it shows the craftmanship that went into stop motion animation. Early CGI however, for example Lost in Space, has aged really badly. Same with movies relying on a lot of blue screen effects, Willow and Big trouble in little China continually break immersion in HD.

48 fps will also be better suited to some and worse for other. Peter Jackson introduced it for a fantasy movie which is not the best fit for the genre. 48 fps is more suited high speed, realistic action scenese. There are plenty of pre cgi car stunts that would have looked awesome in 48fps. Maybe it could instill some new live into the next James Bond movie. Or you could use it for a documentary style filming approach like District 9. It will certainly help getting the blur out of shaky cam.

48fps and 4K can greatly enhance immersion. I'm looking forward to seeing the 4K masters of Baraka and Samsara some day. Whether 48fps works with those kind of dream like movies I don't know. They were shot in 70mm for 24fps anyway with slow steady camera movements.

High speed tracking shots will benefit the most from hfr. Your eyes have a natural tendency to track things with your eyes, what you follow is in perfect focus, things that move differently get motion blur. A film camera can only keep whatever moves with the camera view motion blur free. 48fps gives you eyes more freedom to what to look at. (which can also be a bad thing, no hiding flaws in panning shots) Same with 3D, it's less taxing on your eyes the more of the scene is in focus. Heavy use of depth of field can be very tiring in 3D.

We'll need a new format first anyway. Blu-ray is still heavily compressed, not really suited to high speed action scenes with lots going on. H.265 is a more efficient codec but that alone is not enough for the step to 4K and/or 48fps. 500Gb and 1Tb blu-ray discs are being developed right now and could be introduced in 2015. The BDA should reveal their plans for 4K and HFR physical media at the end of the year.

Youtube links? Its useless, youtube limit is 30fps